officially dec 2003. But started reading about it since april 2001, started reading alot more after sept 2001

mmmm, that is odd...

Ok, anyway, this is the biggest dumbshit argument I've ever heard. Retard blink 200 times a minute Joel Olsteen says that the digestive system of a pig can't process all the toxins out of food because it only takes 4 hours. The digestive system isn't the only organ that processes toxins out of the body so going by how long it takes a pig to move food to crap is meaningless.

And this is funny, the jackass says you can't eat anything that scavenges. No shrimp... no crabs.... No oysters but he says fish are ok... but the stupid fucking assclown doesn't know that some fish are bottom feeders and do the same thing. what an ass. And some of those bottom feeders make for the best eating like: catfish, halibut, flounder, bass and cod. There is nothing inherently toxic about eating shimp, clams or all these others seafoods... This is religious nuttbaggery that deserves nothing but a punch in the face of the ignoramous spewing it. But hey, he said fish are ok so the assclowns in the audience will go out and buy fish to eat... Chances are many will end up buying bottom feeders like flounder and halibut and feel really happy about themselves even though they are now eating an animal that pretty much eats the crap left over on the bottom of the waters the same as he warned against eating other things for lol...

A_ahmed is now probably saying, "oh shit... wait mom, scratch the tilapia from the shopping list"

avxo attempts to beat knowledge what he believes into those who refuse to learnbelieve.

A person that self glorifies themselves and has no manners in speaking is lacking knowledge in my opinion. Ridiculing, cynicism, sarcasm, slander, etc... is not the trait of a wise or knowledgeable individual. It's one thing if others were ridiculing him to begin with and he responds equally. However he is the one that opens the can. In the many years I've been debating and talking with atheists, they all have this trait of self glorifying superiority over others, ironically always citing how 'religions' or those who are 'religious' are try to shuv down their throats their beliefs.

I really don't care what axvo has to say quite frankly, it's a waste of my time.

Your understanding, at least as far as United States jurisprudence goes, is quite flawed. The language of the First Amendment is clear: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You ought to read the background and the decision of the Supreme Court in a case called Brandenburg v. Ohio. It's likely to answer all the questions you have, and quite a few that you don't.

Because falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater actually and directly endangers others. You do not have a 'right' to endanger others anymore than you have a 'right' to kick them in the groin. But as I noted above, check out Brandenburg v. Ohio. If you're feeling adventurous, check out Schenck v. U.S. (which is where the "can't yell 'fire' in a theater" line comes from).

LOL, Thanks for that clarification, ...I was actually being facetious.I know why you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre. To say that passing laws against that, is different from passing laws against willfull purposeful provocation is a load of rubbish imo.

LOL, Thanks for that clarification, ...I was actually being facetious.I know why you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre. To say that passing laws against that, is different from passing laws against willfull purposeful provocation is a load of rubbish imo.

Provocative words aren't the problem and there's nothing inherently bad or evil about provocative words. In fact, sometimes, they are the means to say things that are really important.

The words of the Founding Fathers of the United States were willfully and purposefully provocative. They roused a people to overthrow a King and seek a new way of life.

The words of Havel Václav were willfully and purposefully provocative. They roused a nation and put it on a path the freedom.

The words of anti-communists in Russia and Cuba were willfully and purposefully provocative.

Even the words of Jesus were, according to the Bible, willfully and purposefully provocative.

Your suggestion that we need to legislate away free speech by neutering what we can say is ridiculous. I'd say you should be mocked and ridiculed and I'm being willfully and purposefully provocative. And if you take offense to that, go fuck yourself.

You are just proving the hypocrisy in your belief and in your response and only radiating the same momentum behind american governance and in general western hypocricy. I already cited examples of so called 'free speech' in france, uk, etc... it's all the same never ending double standards and hypocricy

Free speech has become a whore that gets passed around in a brothel. It's sad and disgusting at the same time.

You call what you want free speech and you want to restrict it when you see fit.

Exclusively in this discussion, it is free speech to mock, slander, spread hate, lie against and attack Muslims, however it is not free speech when in whatever situation you CHOSE it not to be 'free speech'

It's just how everyone gets labeled 'radical', 'extremist', 'terrorist' whenever the US, UK, france and other 'western' interests see fit.

However it is free speech to burn qur'an, not terrorist when bombing countries and killing a million+ people in ten years. While burning american flags is 'radical' and 'extremist', despicable, etc...

Provocative words aren't the problem and there's nothing inherently bad or evil about provocative words. In fact, sometimes, they are the means to say things that are really important.

The words of the Founding Fathers of the United States were willfully and purposefully provocative. They roused a people to overthrow a King and seek a new way of life.

The words of Havel Václav were willfully and purposefully provocative. They roused a nation and put it on a path the freedom.

The words of anti-communists in Russia and Cuba were willfully and purposefully provocative.

Even the words of Jesus were, according to the Bible, willfully and purposefully provocative.

Your suggestion that we need to legislate away free speech by neutering what we can say is ridiculous. I'd say you should be mocked and ridiculed and I'm being willfully and purposefully provocative. And if you take offense to that, go fuck yourself.

I don't suggest the need to legislate away free speech at all, I'm simply saying people it's hypocrisy to argue for free speech on the one hand, and legislate it away on the other. As well too, people shouldn't be surprised or perplexed when they get what they ask for.

You do realize that the 'FREE SPEECH' argument is being used right now to attack America, ...and provide diplomatic cover to further attack America, ...but I don't think it's going to end the way the provocateurs intended. At least I hope not, ...for all our sakes.

Exclusively in this discussion, it is free speech to mock, slander, spread hate, lie against and attack Muslims, however it is not free speech when in whatever situation you CHOSE it not to be 'free speech'

Well one would think such a 'moral society' with such 'high standards' wouldn't endorse slander, mockery and lying as 'free speech'.

Americans are busy doing alot of killing. Apparently you have cold feelings towards 1 million+ ppl being slaughtered by America in ten years. Just a number. Alot of Americans on this forum certainly do. Furthermore quite a few use their 'freedom of speech' to advocte for murder and praise the murder of millions of muslims.

Well one would think such a 'moral society' with such 'high standards' wouldn't endorse slander, mockery and lying as 'free speech'.

Americans are busy doing alot of killing. Apparently you have cold feelings towards 1 million+ ppl being slaughtered by America in ten years. Just a number. Alot of Americans on this forum certainly do. Furthermore quite a few use their 'freedom of speech' to advocte for murder and praise the murder of millions of muslims.

Americans are killing those(Muslims) that have made it perfectly clear they would do the same to Westerners if they had the fire-power. That's what's crazy about Muslims, they run around in a permanent state of outrage threatening others, yet they don't have the muscle to back it up. Muslims are like a crazy person picking a fight with a man with a gun.